Difference between revisions of "CSCR-065 Make conjunctionCode 0..1 optional on precondition"
Rik.Smithies (talk | contribs) |
Rik Smithies (talk | contribs) |
||
| (9 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Back to [[Clinical Statement Change Requests]] page. | Back to [[Clinical Statement Change Requests]] page. | ||
{|width=100% cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 border=1 | {|width=100% cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2 border=1 | ||
| − | || '''Submitted by:''' | + | || '''Submitted by:''' Rik Smithies |
| − | || '''Revision date:''' | + | || '''Revision date:''' 19-Sep-2006 |
|- | |- | ||
| − | || '''Submitted date:''' | + | || '''Submitted date:''' 19-Jun-2006 |
| − | || '''Change request ID:''' | + | || '''Change request ID:''' CSCR-065 |
|- | |- | ||
|} | |} | ||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
Precondition off ObservationRange and also off Criterion have conjunctionCode – [0..1] Required. | Precondition off ObservationRange and also off Criterion have conjunctionCode – [0..1] Required. | ||
| − | Some models have no use case for "condition links" between | + | Some models have no use case for "condition links" between these acts and so never need to use conjunctionCode. |
Since it is Required models cannot be Clinical Statement compliant without supporting this. | Since it is Required models cannot be Clinical Statement compliant without supporting this. | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
== Rationale == | == Rationale == | ||
| − | + | This means the attributes can be refined out completely in models that don't need them. | |
== Discussion == | == Discussion == | ||
| + | 24 August 2006 | ||
| + | This request was submitted so as to align Clinical Statement with the Lab model. Patrick agreed that Lab should revisit their model with respect to the use of conjunctionCode where there was a cardinality of greater than 1 on a condition or precondition. The request should be put on hold for the outcome of the Lab discussion. | ||
== Recommended Action Items == | == Recommended Action Items == | ||
| Line 33: | Line 35: | ||
== Resolution == | == Resolution == | ||
| + | |||
| + | Lab Sig have said (Patrick Loyd, 14-Sep-06) that they will add conjunctionCode to their models. Hence they will comply with current Clinical Statement and there is no need for Clinical Statement to change. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Hence this CR is '''withdrawn'''. | ||
Latest revision as of 16:31, 19 September 2006
Editing of Change Requests is restricted to the submitter and the co-chairs of the Clinical Statement Project. Other changes will be undone. Please add comments to the "discussion" page associated with this Change Request.
Back to Clinical Statement Change Requests page.
| Submitted by: Rik Smithies | Revision date: 19-Sep-2006 |
| Submitted date: 19-Jun-2006 | Change request ID: CSCR-065 |
Issue
Precondition off ObservationRange and also off Criterion have conjunctionCode – [0..1] Required.
Some models have no use case for "condition links" between these acts and so never need to use conjunctionCode.
Since it is Required models cannot be Clinical Statement compliant without supporting this.
This is very similar to the previously agreed CSCR-048
Recommendation
- Relax these attributes to be 0..1 Optional.
Rationale
This means the attributes can be refined out completely in models that don't need them.
Discussion
24 August 2006
This request was submitted so as to align Clinical Statement with the Lab model. Patrick agreed that Lab should revisit their model with respect to the use of conjunctionCode where there was a cardinality of greater than 1 on a condition or precondition. The request should be put on hold for the outcome of the Lab discussion.
Recommended Action Items
Resolution
Lab Sig have said (Patrick Loyd, 14-Sep-06) that they will add conjunctionCode to their models. Hence they will comply with current Clinical Statement and there is no need for Clinical Statement to change.
Hence this CR is withdrawn.
